Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" that would be a very difficult location to see from the foramen magnum with a "light". When I referred to two area, I was suggesting the NaCL rinse, and the actual scraping that I believe was retrieved by Spitz, and processed by the State.
Also, I don't recall seeing "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" in Dr G's report.
Couldn't it be possible to inspect the inside of a skeletonized skull using some kind of endoscope, high magnification fiber optic camera, x-ray and/or ultrasound without opening it?
Just curious...TIA
At one time, he was as good as there was. But now, not so much. Dr S is way, way past his prime, and I think that must have been obvious to the jury. He appeared to me to be completely in the tank for the defense and I think that was probably the way the jury saw it too. Ashton was able to rattle him and by letting him talk (quite a bit of nonsense) and accuse people of crimes without basis, he almost certainly left the jury with an unfavorable impression. For example, Spitz didn't seem too clear about the facts around the time Caylee went missing...whatever set you want to use. Spitz said he talked to Baez about the circumstances, but he didn't seem aware of any accidental drowning. He seemed under the impression that Caylee was left with a sitter..... Apparently Jose didn't give him all the facts.Dr. S. was a horrible witness, imo. No question.
If "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" that would be a very difficult location to see from the foramen magnum with a "light". When I referred to two area, I was suggesting the NaCL rinse, and the actual scraping that I believe was retrieved by Spitz, and processed by the State.
Also, I don't recall seeing "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" in Dr G's report.
We are at somewhat of a disadvantage because we can't see any skull photos. But something interesting happened today.
Spitz saw the photos and said that he could not see any hair on top of the skull at the crime scene but viola there suddenly is hair on the skull in the lab autopsy photos.
Aston could have easily slapped up the photo of the crime scene and said "Look there! You can see hair on the skull can't you? Use your glasses if you need them." But he didn't do that. It's as if he too can see that there isn't skull hair at the crime scene. All he did was ask Spitz to reaffirm his claim that the hair had been manipulated. Ashton didn't use the photos to show that it hadn't been manpulated. Was that because Spitz was correct that some of the hair actually had been moved up onto the skull?
Isn't there another reasonable possibility?If "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" that would be a very difficult location to see from the foramen magnum with a "light". When I referred to two area, I was suggesting the NaCL rinse, and the actual scraping that I believe was retrieved by Spitz, and processed by the State.
Also, I don't recall seeing "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" in Dr G's report.
It's hard to know what the jurors have in their heads. We can't always assume that they are thinking the exact same thing that we are. Ashton tore into Spitz because he is concerned that they will believe him if he doesn't. But witnessing that from our armchairs is no guarantee that everything Spitz said to raise doubt will be ignored by the jury. It's the same thing with Huntington bug guy and the upcoming Rodriguez.
I think when Garavaglia comes back that Mason will have another go at her. He's going to force her to say that the tape could have been applied after death no matter what her common sense tells her.
But he has a great mind, and I think JA goofed by pushing Spitz's buttons this morning. As Spitz's put it "...well now you've provoked me!" might not have looked too PROfessional of JA.
The "sediment" was from two different areas inside the cranium. Some on the inside of the cap, and some in the crevices of the cribriform plate... which in order to see, you must open the top of the skull. My point... and Dr S's.
LongtimeMedic, it's probably just me ~ but I can't find any reference to the cribriform plate in the Dr S's report that I'm seeing. The report I'm reading from says, "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone, spread over an approximately two inch diameter area." Could you please share the link to your reference for me? TIA
Here's my link: http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2011/0314/27194964.pdf
Again, all I can find is Dr S's reference to the left temporal bone area. Only one area. Please share where your information has been gathered. TIA.
I don't recall him giving a precise anatomical location, but he did indicate it was in a crevice-like area (paraphrasing of course).
If "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" that would be a very difficult location to see from the foramen magnum with a "light". When I referred to two area, I was suggesting the NaCL rinse, and the actual scraping that I believe was retrieved by Spitz, and processed by the State.
Also, I don't recall seeing "A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone" in Dr G's report.
It bothered me greatly that his age is taking it's toll. He's still a scrappy 'ol guy, and pretty much master of that domain, but his brain has downshifted a couple of times, and his thoughts don't seem to readily flow when he speaks. Plus I think he always leans towards the opinions most supported by dollar signs. He was costing Phil Specter $3k/day anytime he was in the courtroom... PLUS expenses! But he has a great mind, and I think JA goofed by pushing Spitz's buttons this morning. As Spitz's put it "...well now you've provoked me!" might not have looked too PROfessional of JA.
I think what happened was interesting, too. But I don't think Spitz was accusing the medical examiner of impropriety in "manipulating" or "staging" the evidence. All he said was that the hair in the lab photo was not in the same orientation, relative to the skull, as in the crime scene photo. I think he was just pointing out that difference. If he accused anyone of impropriety, it was Ashton, for assuming [and asking Spitz and the jury to assume] that the orientation in the lab scene photo accurately depicted the orientation when the skull was discovered.
I think what happened was interesting, too. But I don't think Spitz was accusing the medical examiner of impropriety in "manipulating" or "staging" the evidence. All he said was that the hair in the lab photo was not in the same orientation, relative to the skull, as in the crime scene photo. I think he was just pointing out that difference. If he accused anyone of impropriety, it was Ashton, for assuming [and asking Spitz and the jury to assume] that the orientation in the lab scene photo accurately depicted the orientation when the skull was discovered.
It bothered me greatly that his age is taking it's toll. He's still a scrappy 'ol guy, and pretty much master of that domain, but his brain has downshifted a couple of times, and his thoughts don't seem to readily flow when he speaks. Plus I think he always leans towards the opinions most supported by dollar signs. He was costing Phil Specter $3k/day anytime he was in the courtroom... PLUS expenses! But he has a great mind, and I think JA goofed by pushing Spitz's buttons this morning. As Spitz's put it "...well now you've provoked me!" might not have looked too PROfessional of JA.